Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 2 of 3  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3 »
Author Message
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 21st, 2014, 3:49 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
how did you size it miho? from the drawing or?

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 21st, 2014, 5:40 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Eight inch guns is a bit of an odd one to me. I can sort of kind of see the idea of a sizable 6" battery for something like a commerce raider, but if you've got no armor at all, you don't really want to be mixing it up with an opponent that requires an 8" battery.

Everybody had cruiser-sub ideas, though, so there must have been some merit to the concept.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 21st, 2014, 9:36 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Some further info on the Tauhschiffe
http://dreadnoughtproject.org/plans/SM_Projekt_50_1918/
Apparently they actually ordered one.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 21st, 2014, 9:53 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 9102
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
acelanceloet wrote:
how did you size it miho? from the drawing or?
under the keel. it stands 212. if it's in feet or meters is difficult to say.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 21st, 2014, 9:58 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
heuhen wrote:
acelanceloet wrote:
how did you size it miho? from the drawing or?
under the keel. it stands 212. if it's in feet or meters is difficult to say.
Those are frame numbers, not length.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
MihoshiK
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 21st, 2014, 10:12 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1035
Joined: October 16th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: In orbit, watching you draw.
Contact: Website
acelanceloet wrote:
how did you size it miho? from the drawing or?
EDIT: Oops, I might be wrong. Those are not meter measurements. She's closer to just over 100 meters.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...
[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 21st, 2014, 10:53 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
MihoshiK wrote:
acelanceloet wrote:
how did you size it miho? from the drawing or?
EDIT: Oops, I might be wrong. Those are not meter measurements. She's closer to just over 100 meters.
We might size based on the torpedoes shown aboard. If we presume them to be the 50cm G7, a popular WW1 unit of 7m overall length, we arrive at about 0.6m per frame. This would suggest a length of about 130m.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 22nd, 2014, 12:22 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
erik_t wrote:
Everybody had cruiser-sub ideas, though, so there must have been some merit to the concept.
Well, If everyone is running the subs under old cruiser rules for shipping interdiction then having surface guns makes sense - a shell is a lot less expensive than a gun, and if you have to surface to check the ship for war material anyway, then it makes sense to have the guns.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
meyer
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 22nd, 2014, 9:04 am
Offline
Posts: 41
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 7:43 am
The exact length of UD 1 aka Projekt 50 was 125.80 meters.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
bsmart
Post subject: Re: US cruiser submarinesPosted: May 22nd, 2014, 2:35 pm
Offline
Posts: 33
Joined: February 24th, 2014, 2:59 pm
TimothyC wrote:
Well, If everyone is running the subs under old cruiser rules for shipping interdiction then having surface guns makes sense - a shell is a lot less expensive than a gun, and if you have to surface to check the ship for war material anyway, then it makes sense to have the guns.
Except that you don't need nine 8" guns to go commerce raiding. A pair of 5" guns would be more than enough to sink an unarmored, unarmed merchant ship. Once you factor in the cost of designing a submarine to mount some of these guns and their turrets I doubt you'd ever save any money over just torpedoing everything. Never mind the engineering challenges of trying to make something like that submersible.

There's a reason cruiser submarines fell out of favor so quickly; everyone realized they were a really, really stupid idea.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 2 of 3  [ 21 posts ]  Return to “Sources and Reference Drawings” | Go to page « 1 2 3 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]